https://doi.org/10.4081/jae.2024.1586
Evaluation of the effects of different openers mounted on no-tillage planters on maize: a field study
Published: 31 May 2024
Abstract Views: 205
PDF: 118
Publisher's note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Authors
The openers are the planter components that interact with soil and several researchers studied openers characteristics and behaviour in different conditions, but few explored the effects on crop emergence, growth and yield. The aim of this study is to evaluate and quantify any effects of openers on crop development and yield. The performance of three planters equipped with five different openers were compared on maize in a field test: double disc (DD), punch planter (PP), horizontal furrow with winged opener (HW), vertical furrow with winged opener (VW), vertical furrow with shank opener (SO). Seed spacing, depth, penetration resistance and plant emergences, root dry mass and yield were measured respectively on seeding slots and during crop development to evaluate openers effects. The results showed low variability in seed depth and spacing when DD and PP openers were used despite higher level of compaction on DD slot. High variability was found on maize plants when VW and HW openers were used. SO obtained relevantly lower yield in absolute value -35% (1.7 Mg ha-1) compared to other openers. However, the high variability observed in the different replicates and plant adaptability to stress conditions could explain the absence of significant differences in crop yield.
Ahmad, F., Weimin, D., Qishou, D., Rehim, A., Jabran, K., 2017. Comparative performance of various disc-type furrow openers in no-till paddy field conditions. Sustain. 9. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9071143
Aikins, K.A., Barr, J.B., Ucgul, M., Jensen, T.A., Antille, D.L., Desbiolles, J.M.A., 2020. No-tillage furrow opener performance: a review of tool geometry, settings and interactions with soil and crop residue. Soil Res. 58, 603–621.
Baker, C.J., Saxton, K.E., 2007. No-tillage seeding in conservation agriculture. Cabi.
Benetti, M., DeRos A., Sozzi, M., Sartori, L.., 2022. Performance of a new punch planter on organic mulch. unpublished.
Blanco-canqui, H., Lal, R., 2021. Soil structure and organic carbon relationships following 10 years of wheat straw management in no-till. Soil Tillage Res. 95, 240–254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2007.01.004
Botta, G.F., Tolon-Becerra, A., Lastra-Bravo, X., Tourn, M., 2010. Tillage and traffic effects (planters and tractors) on soil compaction and soybean (Glycine max L.) yields in Argentinean pampas. Soil Tillage Res. 110, 167–174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2010.07.001
Celik, A., Ozturk, I., Way, T.R., 2007. Effects of various planters on emergence and seed distribution uniformity of sunflower. Appl. Eng. Agric. 23, 57–61.
Chaudhuri, D., 2001. Performance Evaluation of Various Types of Furrow Openers on Seed Drills * a Review 79, 125–137. https://doi.org/10.1006/jaer.2000.0688
Choudhary, M.A., Guo Pei Yu, Baker, C.J., 1985. Seed placement effects on seedling establishment in direct-drilled fields. Soil Tillage Res. 6, 79–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-1987(85)90008-X
Dang, Y.P., Dalal, R.C., Menzies, N.W., 2020. No-Till Farming Systems for Sustainable Agriculture: Challenges and Opportunities, No-Till Farming Systems for Sustainable Agriculture. Springer.
Hasimu, A., Chen, Y., 2014. Soil disturbance and draft force of selected seed openers. Soil Tillage Res. 140, 48–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2014.02.011
Iqbal, M., Marley, S.J., Erbach, D.C., Kaspar, T.C., 1998. An evaluation of seed furrow smearing. Trans. Am. Soc. Agric. Eng. 41, 1243–1248. https://doi.org/10.13031/2013.17289
ISO/TC 23, 1984. ISO 7256-1: 1984 Sowing equipment - Test methods - Part 1: single seed drills (precision drills).
Kachman, S.D., Smith, J.A., 1995. Alternative measures of accuracy in plant spacing for planters using single seed metering. Trans. ASAE 38, 379–387.
Kassam, A., Friedrich, T., Shaxson, F., Pretty, J., 2009. The spread of conservation agriculture: Justification, sustainability and uptake. Int. J. Agric. Sustain. 7, 292–320. https://doi.org/10.3763/ijas.2009.0477
Knappenberger, T., Köller, K., 2012. Spatial assessment of the correlation of seeding depth with emergence and yield of corn. Precis. Agric. 13, 163–180. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11119-011-9235-4
Kocher, M.F., Coleman, J.M., Smith, J.A., Kachman, S.D., 2011. Corn seed spacing uniformity as affected by seed tube condition. Appl. Eng. Agric. 27, 177–183.
Lal, R., 2013. Food security in a changing climate. Ecohydrol. Hydrobiol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecohyd.2013.03.006
Liu, K., Zanchin, A., Sozzi, M., Gasparini, F., Benetti, M., Sartori, L., 2021. Evaluation of seeding unit equipped with shock absorber suspension on corn and sunflower, in: 2021 IEEE International Workshop on Metrology for Agriculture and Forestry (MetroAgriFor). pp. 114–119. https://doi.org/10.1109/MetroAgriFor52389.2021.9628859
Malasli, M.Z., Celik, A., 2019. Disc angle and tilt angle effects on forces acting on a single-disc type no-till seeder opener. Soil Tillage Res. 194, 104304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2019.104304
Nunes, M.R., de Lima, R.P., Tormena, C.A., Karlen, D.L., 2021. Corn seedling root growth response to soil physical quality. Agron. J. 113, 3135–3146. https://doi.org/10.1002/agj2.20705
Panning, J.W., Kocher, M.F., Smith, J.A., Kachman, S.D., 2000. Laboratory and field testing of seed spacing uniformity for sugarbeet planters. Appl. Eng. Agric. 16, 7–13.
Ross, F., Di Matteo, J., Cerrudo, A., 2020. Maize prolificacy: A source of reproductive plasticity that contributes to yield stability when plant population varies in drought-prone environments. F. Crop. Res. 247, 107699. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2019.107699
Swanepoel, P.A., le Roux, P.J.G., Agenbag, G.A., Strauss, J.A., Maclaren, C., 2019. Seed-drill opener type and crop residue load affect canola establishment, but only residue load affects yield. Agron. J. 111, 1658–1665. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj2018.10.0695
Tamburini, G., Bommarco, R., Wanger, T.C., Kremen, C., van der Heijden, M.G.A., Liebman, M., Hallin, S., 2020. Agricultural diversification promotes multiple ecosystem services without compromising yield. Sci. Adv. 6. https://doi.org/10.1126/SCIADV.ABA1715
Tokatlidis, I.S., Koutroubas, S.D., 2004. A review of maize hybrids’ dependence on high plant populations and its implications for crop yield stability. F. Crop. Res. 88, 103–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2003.11.013
Trentin, R.G., Modolo, A.J., Vargas, T. de O., Campos, J.R. da R., Adami, P.F., Baesso, M.M., 2018. Produtividade de soja em Latossolo compactado em função de mecanismos sulcadores. Acta Sci. - Agron. 40, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.4025/actasciagron.v40i1.35015
Vamerali, T., Bertocco, M., Sartori, L., 2006. Effects of a new wide-sweep opener for no-till planter on seed zone properties and root establishment in maize (Zea mays, L.): A comparison with double-disk opener. Soil Tillage Res. 89, 196–209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2005.07.011
How to Cite
Benetti, M. (2024) “Evaluation of the effects of different openers mounted on no-tillage planters on maize: a field study”, Journal of Agricultural Engineering, 55(3). doi: 10.4081/jae.2024.1586.
Copyright (c) 2024 the Author(s)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
PAGEPress has chosen to apply the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0) to all manuscripts to be published.
Similar Articles
- Ugo Lazzaro, Caterina Mazzitelli, Benedetto Sica, Paola Di Fiore, Nunzio Romano, Paolo Nasta, On evaluating the hypothesis of shape similarity between soil particle-size distribution and water retention function , Journal of Agricultural Engineering: Vol. 54 No. 4 (2023)
- Giuliano Vox, Pierfrancesco Losito, Fabio Valente, Rinaldo Consoletti, Giacomo Scarascia-Mugnozza, Evelia Schettini, Cristoforo Marzocca, Francesco Corsi, A wireless telecommunications network for real-time monitoring of greenhouse microclimate , Journal of Agricultural Engineering: Vol. 45 No. 2 (2014)
- Alvaro Marucci, Danilo Monarca, Andrea Colantoni, Enio Campiglia, Andrea Cappuccini, Analysis of the internal shading in a photovoltaic greenhouse tunnel , Journal of Agricultural Engineering: Vol. 48 No. 3 (2017)
- Valentina Giovenzana, Roberto Beghi, Riccardo Guidetti, Massimiliano Luison, Tiziana Nardi, Evaluation of energy savings in white winemaking: impact of temperature management combined with specific yeasts choice on required heat dissipation during industrial-scale fermentation , Journal of Agricultural Engineering: Vol. 54 No. 3 (2023)
- Igor Kovacev, Daniele De Wrachien, Report on the 43rd International Symposium: Actual Tasks on Agricultural Engineering, 24th-27th February 2015, Opatija, Croatia , Journal of Agricultural Engineering: Vol. 46 No. 1 (2015)
- Daniela Lovarelli, Elisabetta Riva, Gabriele Mattachini, Marcella Guarino, Giorgio Provolo, Assessing the effect of barns structures and environmental conditions in dairy cattle farms monitored in Northern Italy , Journal of Agricultural Engineering: Vol. 52 No. 4 (2021)
You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.
